Sigma 17mm f4 v Panasonic 18mm f1.8 v Zooms

[jrp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The weight and cost favour the Sigma. The brightness favours the Panasonic, by 2 stops. 
 

The Sigma seems to be a good (but perhaps not stellar performer). The Panasonic seems to be sharper in the centre and weaker in the edges. 
 

The various 14-24 / 16-xx zooms also seems to be comparable performers, at the obvious expense of weight/bulk. 
 

My inclination is to go with the 17mm for its weight (for certain shots on city trips), as it will always be a nich focal length and so better to have something that you’ll take on a just in case basis, than a better, but heavier, lens that you’ll leave at home. But equally, a lot of my wide angle shots are inside, so the f4 can be a bit of a limitation. 
 

anyone else been through this process?

[Geoff C. Bassett]

Don't overlook the Panasonic 14-28, especially if weight is a concern and your primarily using it for travel.

Edited May 5, 2024 by Geoff C. Bassett

[jrp]

Yes, there seems to be a plethora of wide angle zooms.   16-35mm f4, 14/16-24/28mm. 
 

The reviews are a bit inconsistent, however, which makes it hard to pick. …

[tritentrue]

On both the SL2 and SL2-S, Leica's perspective control often fails to accurately correct keystoning with the Sigma 17mm f/4; and images additionally sometimes show minor barrel distortion. 

[huwm]

I was only interested in zooms for this range and tried the sigma 16-28 f2.8 then panny 14-24 fv before settling on panny spro 16-35 f4 because I use it as a walk around and if I do end up indoors it’s fine on the SL2S

[Elsee]

Sigma 17mm works well on Panasonic S5. It's overall very sharp. Not very bright but I think it's enough for a wide angle, in camera stabilisation definitely helps a lot. 

Only downside is I had to go throughout 4 samples to find one without noticeable dust speck inside rear glass. However they were all well centered. It has good sharpness across the frame from wide open. It's like a wider 24mm 3,5, I'm happy with my purchase. 

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Stabilization? For a 17 mm? I may be decrepit, but not that far gone…😉

Anyway, welcome to the forum. Yes Sigmas work very nicely with all L mount cameras. 

[Elsee]

Hello, I was responding to "is f/4 bright enough" ? It's a wide angle so you dont care about bokeh. Stabilisation still helps in low light for still subjects: no matter the focal it's easier to get a sharp picture and there is less noise. 

[Donald M]

I compared the Sigma 17mm f4.0 with the Leica Vario-Elmarit 14-24mm f2.8 and found the sharpness of the 17mm slightly better, both at 4.0, especially in the corners.
At higher f stops the differences diminished. For landscape f4.0 or higher is preferred and f1.8 (or f2.8) not really necessary.
The Leica 14-24 is weather sealed, the 17mm is not. The Panasonic sits in between. The Sigma and Panasonic are very light and relatively cheap. The Leica 14-24 is more versatile of course and considerably more expensive, better built and weighty. So it depends on your use case. 
Tested on Leica SL and Lumix s5iix on a tripod. 

Edited May 9, 2024 by Donald M

[Virob]

14 hours ago, Donald M said:

I compared the Sigma 17mm f4.0 with the Leica Vario-Elmarit 14-24mm f2.8 and found the sharpness of the 17mm slightly better, both at 4.0, especially in the corners.
At higher f stops the differences diminished. For landscape f4.0 or higher is preferred and f1.8 (or f2.8) not really necessary.
The Leica 14-24 is weather sealed, the 17mm is not. The Panasonic sits in between. The Sigma and Panasonic are very light and relatively cheap. The Leica 14-24 is more versatile of course and considerably more expensive, better built and weighty. So it depends on your use case. 
Tested on Leica SL and Lumix s5iix on a tripod. 

The other downside to the 14-24 for landscape is it is more difficult to use with filters. Either you have to go with a massive and expensive front filter adapter for a polarizer or ND, or rear mount NDs, but then with the rear mounts, taking the lens on and off to fiddle with filters negates some of the weather sealing advantage.

To the OP, if 17mm and wider are niche focal lengths for you, then I think you are on the right track with a small light prime like the sigma 17.

[Photoworks]

I have the 18mm Panasonic, 15mm Irix 2.4 and 17mm TS_E from canon and the 20-60 Panasonic.

I am just posting because I do Interior photography and need wide angles that can take PL filters.

The 18 Pana is a good lens, AF is good to use in video AFc, and probably that is the best use for it. Sharp in the center, but even f8 a touch less details on the edges.

15 Irix is an EF mount lens that I use with Sigma adapter, for the 4 lenses mentioned, it is the sharper one across, but they all are about the same in the center at f8.
15mm is lots more room in the frame, it can take the 95mm PL filter. it is very inexpensive the manufacturers sell them at big discounts, I got it for $300, the downside is it is manual focus only and need magnification to focus, what is it hard to use on current Leica SL2 firmware. The auto magnification when turning focus is not existing. a little distortion is corrected in capture one by sliding correction to 30, But it is minimal.

the Leica Sigma 14-24 Lens is supposed to be really good, but no PL filter without a big construction.

20-60 is not terrible, it compares to most M lenses. I use it instead the 21 Leica M SEM and quite happy with it. It is very light.

The Canon 17mm tilt shift lens is a special lens, as it is the only one that offers Shift. Big and heavy, and flares with top lights.